A profile isn't filled in. It's built — one loop at a time.
Most tools ask an organisation to describe itself in a form. Beacon works the other way: evidence arrives, claims are extracted from it, disagreements surface, and a person decides what stands. Every pass through the loop makes the profile more solid — and every value in it can prove where it came from.
↺ then the next piece of evidence arrives, and the loop runs again
This walkthrough uses Kōtuku Agency — an entirely synthetic Crown agency — and follows one real question through one full loop: how big is the investment portfolio?
The builder doesn't care how knowledge shows up. A document lands, someone answers a question in conversation, or a value is computed from claims already on the books. All three become the same thing: evidence, with provenance attached.
Document
Risk & Issues Register
Dropped into the engagement — a routine register, nothing prepared specially for us.
Conversation
Interview — Rima Tai, CFO
Answers captured in a session, with the respondent and their consent on record.
Computed
Derived roll-ups
Values calculated from existing claims — labelled as computed, never passed off as testimony.
sources/corpus-seed/risk-issues-register.md · §Kōtuku Agency — Portfolio Risk and Issues Register
…This register consolidates risks and issues across Kōtuku Agency's investment portfolio of $480M spanning 12 active investments, maintained by the Portfolio Management Office (PMO) and reviewed monthly by the Investment Committee…
This quarter's register mentions the portfolio's size in passing. That sentence is about to become evidence.
Step 2 of 5
Claims extracted — every one pinned to its quote
Extraction reads the document and writes claims: small, single-fact statements. The rule is absolute — no claim without a verbatim quote, and the source page is fingerprinted so the quote can be re-verified against the original bytes at any time, by anyone.
C-0126pipeline.portfolio_valueunverified
Kōtuku Agency's investment portfolio totals $480M
“investment portfolio of $480M spanning 12 active investments”
source: risk-issues-register.md · sha256 53dac3e1…c8bc7912 · extracted by sonnet
C-0127pipeline.active_investment_countunverified
The portfolio spans 12 active investments
“investment portfolio of $480M spanning 12 active investments”
source: risk-issues-register.md · sha256 53dac3e1…c8bc7912 · extracted by sonnet
C-0128delivery.pmo_mandateunverified
The risk and issues register is maintained by the Portfolio Management Office (PMO)
“maintained by the Portfolio Management Office (PMO)”
source: risk-issues-register.md · sha256 53dac3e1…c8bc7912 · extracted by sonnet
The machine does the reading; it never does the believing. New claims arrive unverified — belief is earned in the next two steps. This is the inverse of the old Investor Confidence Rating's failure: no manual data loads, and no score a rater can't explain.
Step 3 & 4 of 5
Two sources disagree. The builder shows you — and you decide.
The quarterly report says $455M. This quarter's risk register says $480M. A form would hold one number and hide the argument. The builder holds both, flags the field as disputed, and asks the one question that matters: which one stands?Try it — select one.
C-0110pipeline.portfolio_valuedisputed
Total value of the active portfolio under management as at end of Q4 FY26 is reported at $455M
“the total value of the active portfolio under management is reported at $455M”
source: quarterly-investment-report-q4.md · older reporting period
retained — nothing is deleted, the disagreement stays on the record
⚡ both claim pipeline.portfolio_value
C-0126pipeline.portfolio_valuedisputed
The investment portfolio totals $480M
“investment portfolio of $480M spanning 12 active investments”
source: risk-issues-register.md · current quarter
retained — nothing is deleted, the disagreement stays on the record
Step 5 of 5
The picture updates — one star at a time
Every field in the profile is a star. Selecting a standing value lights this one and marks it with a ring: a person chose this, and signed it. The confidence mix shifts with it — honestly. Fields we haven't earned yet stay dark.
confidence mix — before306 claims
after this loopone field settled
selected & signeddisputedthinnot yet earned
One loop settles one argument. An engagement runs hundreds of loops — and the mix moves star by star, never by assertion. See the full Kōtuku sky →
One loop, every domain
The same builder, pointed at the next questions
Nothing in the loop is specific to company profiles. Evidence, claims, disagreements, human decisions, audit trails — the machinery is domain-neutral by design. New domains arrive as vocabularies over the same evidence, never as new tools. Learn the loop once; use it for everything that follows.
Live now
Organisational profile
Who the organisation is, what it runs, what it's worth — the walkthrough you just did. First domain, same loop.
Next
Maturity assessment
Capability scores computed from the evidence already gathered — each score decomposes back to the claims beneath it. No workshop theatre, no unexplainable rating.
Then
Risk profiling & beyond
Project risk profiles, benefits tracking, the monthly health view — each one another vocabulary over the same growing body of evidence.
This is the quiet advantage: by the time the second domain switches on, the evidence is already there. A maturity assessment on day one of module two draws on everything the profile loop already gathered, verified, and signed.